Seems to Me...

Thursday, August 10, 2017

We’ve all heard it said that
“violence begets violence.” As Martin
Luther King, Jr. put it:

“Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper
darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out
darkness: only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do
that.”

The civil rights leader said that
love can drive out hate. It could also
be said that love begets love. If love
can have the duel effect of driving out hate and begetting more love, then it
seems to me that the answer to the world’s problems is to propagate love. That sounds kind of simplistic but how could
it not work?

What are the major problems that
plague our world? War, Poverty, Hunger,
Disease, Crime, Ignorance. So, let’s say we could wipe out war and use the
resources that have been going into it, to eradicate the other major
problems. Would that solve
everything? I doubt it; unless we could
also drive out greed and hatred, both of which are the by-product of fear.

Albert Einstein said, “Three great forces rule the world: stupidity, fear and greed.” There may be enough money in the world to
wipe out stupidity in the form of illiteracy, but I don’t think it could get
rid of fear and greed. Fear, greed and
hate are products of the darkness. Only
light and love can drive them out.

But is there enough love in this
world to counteract all the fear, greed and hate? It seems to me that there is, but we’re not
propagating it. We’re so wrapped up in,
and focused on, the major problems, which are fed by fear, greed and hate, that
we don’t give Love and Light the attention they need and deserve.

What would happen if people
decided to make spreading love the main purpose of their lives? What if only a fraction of the population
made that commitment and every day when they woke up they would ask themselves,
‘What can I do to spread love today?’ Would that love beget more love and more
love and more love? Or, is this just
the notion of a bleeding heart, head-in-the-clouds, overage hippy liberal? NO!
It’s the core message of all the religions and the greatest prophets in
history. Jesus Christ put it very
simply, “A new commandment I give you, that you love one another.”

Saturday, March 11, 2017

The only way this world is going to survive is if
we realize that we are one, inter-related world. We have the internet that
allows us to communicate with anyone in the world… and wiki-leaks to make sure
that there are no secrets. The pollution
created in one city, or one nation, affects the air and the climate of every
person on earth. And we have nuclear
weapons that can reach and destroy every corner of the planet. Isolationism
is not an option. So those who
are afraid that if we let the “other” in…into our country, into our hearts,
into our legislative decisions, you might lose one of your 50” TVs, get over it.
We are one world, like it or not and we’re not going to go back to the way
things were. The only way humankind is
going to go backwards is if we blow each other to smithereens. And then there
might not be anyone left.

I’m not saying that
we should be one nation with one world leader, not at all. We can remain separate nations, people with
distinct cultures and religious practices.
But we, the people, have to elect leaders who realize that we are one,
small, inter-related world and the decisions they make must take that into consideration. Business
leaders, maybe even more so, must recognize the connectivity between their
decisions and the well-being of, not just their shareholders, but everyone even
remotely influenced by those decisions.

I don’t deny that there is suffering in this country. Of course there is, and we have to look at
how we can alleviate that suffering, with long-term measures. Maybe it would be nice for the coal miners if
they could have their jobs back rather than having to go through job-retraining
but that’s not what this country, or the world, needs. We need alternative sources of energy that
aren’t going to ravage our water supplies and pollute the air. There are certainly sources of revenue in
this country that can finance long-term solutions to the industrial and
environmental problems we are facing.
Just one of those billionaires who now occupy the Whitehouse could
probably make a huge contribution to putting people back to work while at the
same time helping to clean up the environment. But they’d have to stop acting
like ignorant fools and denying what is obvious to the rest of the world.

We’re all going to have to
learn to think, feel and act globally because this is the world we have
made. Self-centered indifference and
militaristic aggression will not make our lives better, will only serve to fuel
hatred, endless war and acts of terrorism. Unless we
learn to respect each other; unless we have compassion for ALL our fellow men,
women and children; unless we recognize that we are all one family and our
neighbor’s needs are just as important as our own, WE WILL NOT SURVIVE.

Monday, December 26, 2016

This article was written by Fr. James Martin, SJ, best-selling
author and editor of the Jesuit magazine, America.

The Synod on the
Family, the gathering of bishops from around the world that just concluded,
changed no Catholic doctrine. None.

But you wouldn't know that from the fierce
reactions the synod evoked. Even the possibility that the church might deal
more openly with, for example, divorced and remarried Catholics or the LGBT
community, sent some Catholics into a near frenzy.

It seemed out of proportion to the synod's
discussions as well as the final document, a rather workaday overview of issues
related to the family. The final report did not, for example, say that divorced
and remarried could return to Communion. Instead it talked about possible
avenues of reconciliation that already existed. Nor did it approve same-sex
marriage. Instead it spoke of respecting LGBT Catholics.

Overall, the document stressed two concepts:
"accompaniment" and "discernment." The church must accompany
families in the complexity of their lives and use discernment, a form of
prayerful decision-making, to help people arrive at good decisions based on
church teaching.

The final document is not even the final word.
Pope Francis will most likely issue his own document within a few months,
summing up the synod's findings and perhaps moving the discussion farther.

But even the hint of change prompted outrage
-- which was directed not only at Pope Francis, but also the bishops at the
synod, Catholic commentators, and from time to time, me. At times, the level of
sheer spite was astounding.

Why?

First, let's give the benefit of the doubt to
people upset by Pope Francis and some of the synod's discussions.

Those disturbed by the possibility of change
are usually devout Catholics who believe that the law is an important part of
Catholic tradition. And it is. Make no mistake: Jesus himself said he came to
"fulfill the law." Many of the church's rules flow directly from the
Gospels. Just consider divorce, the synod topic that captured much of the
attention in the West. It is unequivocally stated by Jesus to be wrong.

Laws also are part of tradition, which
Catholics believe is guided by the Holy Spirit. Even if certain rules do not
come from the lips of Jesus, but rather from popes or other councils like
Vatican II, they are considered to be inspired by the Holy Spirit. Thus, another
reason to oppose change: Why would we change something that either comes from
Jesus or is safeguarded by the Holy Spirit?

So some of the consternation is
understandable.

Some, however, is harder to understand.

For if you're a devout Catholic who believes
in the guidance of the Spirit, then you should also trust that the same Spirit
is guiding Pope Francis and the synod. Sadly, in some corners that trust seems
to have evaporated after the Pope's election, to be replaced with doubt,
suspicion and anger.

Again why?

First, Catholics today often conflate dogma,
doctrine and practice.

In the most basic (and simplified) theological
terms dogma refers to our core beliefs. For example, beliefs like the
Resurrection: That's foundational.

Doctrine encompasses the overall teachings of
the church. For example, the teaching on birth control. Every doctrine is
important, but not every doctrine is dogma. Finally, pastoral practice refers
to how those doctrines are applied in real life. For example, how does a priest
counsel a person who uses birth control?

In the past few decades, we have seen these
three categories collapsed together, at least in the popular Catholic
imagination. It is as if every teaching is seen as dogma. And this has had
disastrous effects. Because a change in one is seen as an attack on everything.

In this view, changing the way that the church
treats divorced and remarried Catholics is not simply an attack on pastoral
practice, but on doctrine and perhaps even dogma. This is not to diminish
important teachings, but rather to put them in their perspective.

Traditionally, we believe in a "hierarchy
of truths," in which some teachings are simply more important than others.
Obviously, the Resurrection is more important than what your pastor says about
a local political candidate. The collapse of these three categories, then,
means that even the hint of change is a threat. Thus some of the anger.

Second, change itself may be difficult for
some Catholics because it threaten one's idea of a stable church. Yet the
church has always changed. Not in its essentials, but in some important
practices, as it responds to what Jesus called the "signs of the
times."

Think of the changes wrought by the Second
Vatican Council: The church's relations with the Jewish people changed utterly.
The translation of the Mass from the Latin into vernacular languages changed
the way we worship. Both were immense changes -- and necessary changes.

Third, a darker reason for the anger: a
crushing sense of legalism of the kind that Jesus warned against. Sadly, I see
this evident in our church, and it is ironic to find this in those who hew to
the Gospels because this is one of the clearest things that Jesus opposed:
"You load people with burdens hard to bear and you yourselves do not lift
a finger to ease them!" he said in the Gospel of Luke.

As the Pope said in his closing remarks to the
synod, the person who truly follows the doctrine is not the one who follows the
letter of the law, but its spirit.

Fourth, even darker reasons for the anger: a
hatred of LGBT Catholics that masks itself as a concern for their souls, a
desire to shut out divorced and remarried because they are "sinful"
and should be excluded from the church's communion, and a self-righteousness
and arrogance that closes one off to the need for mercy. Also, a mere dislike
of change because it threatens the black-and-white worldview.

But change began in the church almost as soon
as the church began. St. Paul prevailed over St. Peter -- the "rock"
upon which Jesus built his church -- over the question of whether the
non-circumcised could be accepted into the faith. Without change early on, the
church would have never moved beyond the Jewish community. St. Paul understood
the need for change, even if it went against some cherished practices.

So did Jesus. He did not hesitate to bend or
even set aside the rules if it meant applying more mercy. When he healed an
infirm woman, painfully stooped over from arthritis or scoliosis, in the Gospel
of Luke, on the Sabbath, he was critiqued for not following the rules. In
response, he excoriates those who sought to lock him into unchanging legalisms:
"Hypocrites!"

Fear of change holds the church back. And it
does something worse. It removes love from the equation. In the past few weeks
I have seen this fear lead to suspicion, mistrust and hate. And at the heart of
this, I believe, is fear.

As St. Paul said, perfect love drives out
fear. But perfect fear drives out love.

Wednesday, November 16, 2016

It seems to me that the important thing now is that we keep
our Christian love and compassion, and the hope it offers, flowing gently and
lovingly through our families and communities.
There’s so much pain, so much fear and anger hanging over and around us,
like a dark fog, keeping the light of our faith from shining through, just when
it is so needed.

No matter how the recent election had turned out, one half
of our nation would have been very unhappy.
Now there are protests on one end of the political spectrum and hate
crimes on the other end. Protest is the
right of every citizen. It’s what our
country was born out of, but it should be
peaceful and respectful and that hasn’t always been the case. Hate crimes are always deplorable.

It seems to me that
it should not be our role as Christians to take sides with, or to condemn, the people who are taking these actions.
While we recognize that certain actions are counter-productive and
destructive, does name-calling and railing against the perpetrators do anything but feed the
anger and fear and add to the darkness?

We don’t have to sit by quietly watching as our country is
torn apart. We can take NON-VIOLENT
actions to protect the most vulnerable members of our society and the principles
that our country was born of. As Rev.
John Dear of Pace e Bene [Peace and All Good] puts it,

“Sitting
back and doing nothing does not help, nor does it reflect our discipleship to
the nonviolent Jesus or our common call to be peacemakers. We have to take a
deep breath, remain centered and mindful, and do what we can to help build the
movements of nonviolence on behalf of the poor, the children, the earth itself.”

Friday, October 14, 2016

It seems to me that Jesus wants us to be united, not necessarily politically but in our love for Him, for the Father and for each other. “I do not ask on behalf of these alone, but for those also who believe in
Me through their word; that they may all be one, just as you,
Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in Us, so that the world may believe
that you have sent me." (John 17:20-21)

We are far from united. We are in an ugly,
escalating war of words with each other.
Jesus said, “…every
kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and no city or house divided
against itself will stand.” (Matthew 12:25)

There has been division between Christians for centuries, but it certainly looks like the current political warfare is widening the division among us, and among
all the people of this nation. It's unanimous that this is the nastiest presidential campaign in
recent history. There is so little
attention given to the very serious issues facing our country and the world, and
so much effort, on both sides, to destroy the other candidate’s
reputation. There have been threats to
imprison the other candidate and thinly disguised suggestions that the opposing
candidate could be permanently eliminated. What is this country coming to?

And it seems to me that instead of demanding that the
candidates focus on the issues, the citizenry is jumping on the “destroy the
other guy” bandwagon and spreading whatever dirt they can dig up on
the candidate they are opposed to, with little effort to discern whether or not
it’s based on truth.

“For God did not send his Son into the world
to condemn the world but in order that the world might be saved through him.” (John 3:17)Jesus
did not condemn individuals. Even though
He was the Messiah promised to the House of Israel, He recognized all people
who turned to him in faith; and He declared, “I
have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They
too will listen to my voice, and there shall beone flock and one shepherd.” (John
10:16).
How can we hear His voice if we’re all shouting at each other?

It seems to me that, as followers of Christ, neither should
we be condemning. Rather we should follow the advice of Pope Francis to, "Study the proposals well,
pray and choose in conscience.”each of us according toour ownconscience which, as we have
been taught, is the ultimate guide to human conduct.

Please feel free to comment but not about the candidates. I am not looking for a political response with regard to the current election.